Jason Perseus
I want the conflict in #Gaza to end but the single-issue #Gaza voters act like the situation isn't nuanced.
Not everyone agrees there is a genocide going on. Genocide has a specific legal definition. Outside observers can *at best* guess at whether the requisite elements exist.
The whole "How can you support genocide?" reply on anything political is just about the dumbest, most mind-numbing position to parrot.
Stop being lazy and engage the issue or gtfo.
silverwizard
Jason Perseus
I think the most proximate starting point for the immediate conflict would be the civilian massacre by Hamas.
Otherwise we can just go around in circles because every act and reaction has justified the next for thousands of years.
No, the main reason people disagree is because there is actual disagreement and not everyone has to think and value the same things you do.
Alex P. 👹
@JasonPerseus @waitworry
when the IDF starts shooting fish in a barrel you kinda have to ask how those fish all got in the barrel in the first place
you keep saying there's ample reason to disagree but you haven't offered any actual examples
Alex P. 👹
@JasonPerseus @waitworry
it's an *incredibly* black-and-white situation given that the starting point of the whole thing is a state of continuing apartheid, blockade, and occupation with the explicit goal of ghettoizing Gaza and ethnically cleansing Palestinians from the West Bank
the main reason people disagree is that they think Palestinians deserve what's happening to them, or that it's a sad inevitability required to achieve some magical dream-Israel that they are obligated to support
Jason Perseus
Yeah it does mean something if it isn’t genocide.
Civilian death can be justified under IHL. It doesn’t mean civilians dying is a good thing, but it doesn’t mean that the US is obligated to act.
So if people don’t agree it’s genocide, then there is room for them to sit where they think it’s bad, but it’s not bad enough for them to act. If it’s genocide, there is no justification.
Jason Perseus
I think it very well could be a genocide and think it should stop, and that we should stop supplying weapons—but it isn’t some black and white situation compelling us to act. There is space to disagree and most people do.
Alex P. 👹
@JasonPerseus
you're some sort of lawyer, right?
feel free to read South Africa's submission to the ICJ if you want a bunch of quotes of Israeli leaders saying they want to do genocidal shit to Gaza
that's an example of documented intent
someone who looks at that and says "looks like a genocide is happening!" isn't avoiding the issue — they've articulating a conclusion based on evidence
but, if their word choice is wrong somehow: u.s. weapons are being used to massacre civilians regularly
Claire, The Ultimate Worrier
@saddestrobots @JasonPerseus yeah but not everyone /agrees/ it's a genocide which means something I guess
Alex P. 👹
@JasonPerseus
none of this can be disputed:
• routine massacres of civilians, including refugees
• non-combatants tortured to the point of death or maiming, including torture of a sexual nature
• famine conditions
• destruction of life-sustaining civilian infrastructure such as hospitals and water treatment facilities
• blockade of humanitarian resources
• targeted attacks on civilian medics and foreign aid workers
setting aside the label for a moment — how can anyone support *all this shit?*
silverwizard
Jason Perseus
@silverwizard @saddestrobots @waitworry
The guy killed someone!
Who cares if it was intentional murder of a child or self-defense against a rapist, the law isn’t related to morality!
Or maybe these legal distinctions matter to how we frame them morally.
GNU social JP is a social network, courtesy of GNU social JP管理人. It runs on GNU social, version 2.0.2-dev, available under the GNU Affero General Public License.
All GNU social JP content and data are available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license.